Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pacifica staff details structural budget gap, VLF backfill losses and limited options
Summary
City staff told council Pacifica faces a long‑running structural deficit exacerbated by recent state decisions to withhold vehicle‑license‑fee (VLF) backfill funds; staff cited a long‑term forecast with multi‑million dollar deficits in coming years and said many prior solutions were one‑time or deferrals.
Pacifica finance and administrative staff told the council Aug. 5 that the city’s fiscal problems are structural and multi‑faceted, not the result of a single budget choice. Assistant City Manager Julia Cardo and Director of Administrative Services Marisol Gomez walked through revenue sources, spending demands, and recent updates from the county and state that have made the gap larger.
Key numbers staff cited included: property tax as the largest general‑fund revenue at roughly 34% (about $18.4 million), a long‑term forecast showing a roughly $2.3 million shortfall in FY 2027‑28 and a $3.8 million shortfall in 2028‑29 under current assumptions, and staff‑reported projections that recent county updates and state withholding could combine to create $7 million to $9.8 million of additional pressure over the next two years. Staff also said the city’s unfunded capital needs remain large (figures in the packet cited roughly $371 million in deferred capital needs previously). Marisol Gomez outlined the service reductions already adopted in the FY 26/27 budget: hiring delays, frozen positions, reduced park maintenance, eliminated portions of senior transportation, deferred equipment and OPEB contributions, and the elimination of verbatim meeting minutes.
On VLF backfill, staff explained the vehicle license fee allocation mechanism and said San Mateo County is one of three counties whose formula results in withheld funds; staff said as of a July county update Pacifica should estimate roughly $2 million less in VLF allocation going forward and that the city has joined county litigation and advocacy efforts to recover the withheld payments.
Staff stressed these pressures are partly outside local control (state allocation and broader economic structure) and that the proposed TUT is one piece of a multi‑pronged approach (economic development, fee updates, grant‑seeking, special districts) to shore up finances.
Quote: "With those two items, if you compound those against our deficit numbers that we were provided to you guys in June 2026, we're looking at $7,000,000 and $9,800,000 deficit over the next 2 years," staff said in the presentation.
What to watch: staff will publish the long‑term financial forecast used in the presentation and the packet contains the backup numbers; the council’s decision to ask voters about a 1¢ TUT moves that revenue path into a public‑decision process ahead of further budget‑reduction exercises.
